DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 95735--------------------------------------------------
*SPLIT FROM HIJACKED THREAT* - Re: TfL, Being in a Bus Lane,
Camden Road SW-BND FROM CAMDEN STREET
DIR By: Cantab1985
Date: October 27, 2025, 8:28 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi [member=4394]henryjago[/member] and
[member=24]Hippocrates[/member],
Thank you for this very useful thread. I received a PCN for
driving in this same stretch of bus lane, and this thread helped
me draft an informal challenge. Unfortunately, the challenge was
rejected, and today I received the Enforcement Notice. I am
going to submit a formal representation, but wanted to check
what you selected as grounds for representation (There was no
breach of the bus lane order or regulation OR Other mitigating
circumstances) as I would hate for it to be rejected on a
technicality.
Many thanks.
#Post#: 96371--------------------------------------------------
Re: Re: TfL, Being in a Bus Lane, Camden Road SW-BND FROM CAMDEN
STREET
DIR By: henryjago
Date: October 31, 2025, 3:44 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi [member=7221]Cantab1985[/member]
Sorry to hear you got done too. The text of my formal
representation is in the above thread in full. It was basically
the same as the informal rep.
Don't be deterred by the fact your informal rep was rejected -
their business model works on the basis that they reject
virtually every informal rep.
I think the the key point in my case was that they said that
"BUS LANE" was clearly written in the road (which they are
required to do) - and it wasn't. So unless they've gone back and
put it on the road since, I'd focus on that. But you can see my
other rationale about inadequate signage and errors on the PCN
and Enforcement Notice too.
Ultimately, I do not know why my PCN was cancelled, but I
suspect (or like to think) they realised they would lose at
tribunal on the basis they made a factual error re the legend.
But in reality, it may be that they were simply overwhelmed and
couldn't reply within a decent period of time. Who knows.
Good luck!
#Post#: 96373--------------------------------------------------
Re: Re: TfL, Being in a Bus Lane, Camden Road SW-BND FROM CAMDEN
STREET
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: October 31, 2025, 4:08 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
PM me if you need help and start your own thread. They have
staffing issues.
#Post#: 96392--------------------------------------------------
Re: Re: TfL, Being in a Bus Lane, Camden Road SW-BND FROM CAMDEN
STREET
DIR By: Cantab1985
Date: October 31, 2025, 7:57 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for your replies [member=4394]henryjago[/member] and
[member=24]Hippocrates[/member].
I'm very grateful for this thread, as without it, I probably
would have just paid up when I received the initial PCN, even
though I had a strong feeling something must be off, as I'm
generally really careful to avoid bus lanes. Suspiciously, the
PCN only arrived on the final day to pay the discounted amount,
and as I don't live in London I wasn't able to get to Camden to
check the signage and road markings, but thanks to this thread I
was able to submit a decent challenge.
As expected, the challenge was rejected. Interestingly, in the
rejection letter, they state "the bus lane is clearly marked out
on the road surface", and "The legend 'BUS LANE' is marked on
the road". However, I have since been able to visit the location
(and take photographs) and can confirm this is incorrect. The
only road markings on this stretch of road are 'BUS STOP'.
I submitted my formal representation earlier (see below),
borrowing heavily from your version (I hope you don't mind).
Hopefully, they will reach the same conclusion as with your case
and eventually cancel the fine - I'll update this thread when I
hear back.
It's outrageous that TfL are targeting motorists in such
underhanded ways, but wonderful that people like you are here to
help us fight back, so huge thanks to you both once again!
I am writing to make formal representations against the
Enforcement Notice issued in respect of the above Penalty Charge
Notice. I dispute liability for the alleged contravention on the
grounds that (1) the signage and road markings are inadequate
and misleading, and (2) the enforcement documentation contains
material procedural and legal errors rendering the PCN
unenforceable.
1. Inadequate and misleading signage
The advance warning sign on Camden Road (before Lyme Street) is
obscured by a Congestion Charge sign. Please see image 1. There
should be adequate advance warning of the presence of a bus
lane.
The bus lane then begins immediately after the yellow box
junction at Camden Street, where the dotted white line of the
bus lane meets the junction line, leaving no safe opportunity
for drivers to adjust. Please see image 2.
Additionally, the lane arrow before the junction directs
motorists to continue straight on, yet doing so immediately
leads into the bus lane. Please see image 3. This is
contradictory and misleading.
The carriageway also lacks “Bus Lane” markings found on other
Camden bus lanes. Please see image 4. At no point does the bus
lane have the words “Bus Lane” written on the tarmac from its
commencement at Camden Street to the end.
Collectively, these factors fail to meet the requirements of The
Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016 (TSRGD)
and the Traffic Management Act 2004 for clear and lawful
signage.
2. Procedural and legal errors
The notes on the Enforcement Notice incorrectly identify it as a
“Penalty Charge Notice” (see Image 5). This misdescription is
misleading and confusing, as the two documents serve distinct
statutory purposes.
The Enforcement Notice refers to The Interpretation Act, which
is irrelevant and confusing, since the legislation governing bus
lane enforcement specifies actions from the date of the Notice,
not from deemed service. This error could mislead recipients
regarding timeframes and rights.
The statement: “Any written correspondence before the issue of
the Enforcement Notice will not be treated as a formal
representation.” unlawfully fetters discretion. Section 4(3)(e)
of the London Local Authorities Act 1996 (see
HTML https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukla/1996/9/section/4/enacted)<br
/>states that the authority may serve an Enforcement Notice. By
stating it will, the Council misrepresents its legal discretion.
The assertion: “It will not entitle you to the right of appeal.”
is legally incorrect and contrary to natural justice. The
following paragraph then suggests such correspondence will be
considered, directly contradicting the previous statement and
creating confusion.
The statement: “Failure to respond or contact us within 28
days... will result in the Enforcement Notice automatically
being sent to you...” is inaccurate and fetters discretion. The
legislation provides that the authority may serve an Enforcement
Notice; it is not an automatic process.
Conclusion
The combination of inadequate and misleading signage and
multiple procedural defects renders this PCN invalid and
unenforceable. I therefore respectfully request that the
Enforcement Notice be cancelled and no further enforcement
action taken.
#Post#: 96485--------------------------------------------------
Re: *SPLIT FROM HIJACKED THREAT* - Re: TfL, Being in a Bus Lane,
Camden Road SW-BND FROM CAMDEN STREET
DIR By: ivanleo
Date: November 1, 2025, 8:37 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[member=7221]Cantab1985[/member] you now have your own thread,
we don't hijack other people's threads as that makes things
unmanageable very quickly.
If you follow Hippocrates' advice you can't really go wrong.
#Post#: 96564--------------------------------------------------
Re: *SPLIT FROM HIJACKED THREAT* - Re: TfL, Being in a Bus Lane,
Camden Road SW-BND FROM CAMDEN STREET
DIR By: Cantab1985
Date: November 2, 2025, 5:11 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Sorry [member=1]cp8759[/member], I wasn't intending to hijack,
added to the thread as it was a PCN for identical location and
offence so thought it was relevant. I neglected to read the
house rules. Apologies! Thanks for sorting.
#Post#: 99152--------------------------------------------------
Re: *SPLIT FROM HIJACKED THREAT* - Re: TfL, Being in a Bus Lane,
Camden Road SW-BND FROM CAMDEN STREET
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: November 21, 2025, 7:14 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Tribunal time.
#Post#: 114091--------------------------------------------------
Re: *SPLIT FROM HIJACKED THREAT* - Re: TfL, Being in a Bus Lane,
Camden Road SW-BND FROM CAMDEN STREET
DIR By: AlexS
Date: March 23, 2026, 7:56 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[member=7221]Cantab1985[/member]
I've just received a PCN for that exact same "bus lane" (CAMDEN
ROAD SW-BND FROM CAMDEN STREET).
It certainly is a trap, led in from a yellow box junction into a
"bus lane" that's only marked as a bus stop.
I was wondering if you can update me as to what happened with
your case. I am tempted to use your text as grounds for appeal.
#Post#: 114616--------------------------------------------------
Re: *SPLIT FROM HIJACKED THREAT* - Re: TfL, Being in a Bus Lane,
Camden Road SW-BND FROM CAMDEN STREET
DIR By: AlexS
Date: March 27, 2026, 9:49 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I'll take the lack of response as a defeat.
#Post#: 114659--------------------------------------------------
Re: *SPLIT FROM HIJACKED THREAT* - Re: TfL, Being in a Bus Lane,
Camden Road SW-BND FROM CAMDEN STREET
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: March 27, 2026, 2:16 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: AlexS link ---
>
> I'll take the lack of response as a defeat.
>
--- End Quote ---
Not necessarily ! If the case has gone to London Tribunals it
may be later this year. We're seeing some recent cases getting
dates in September.
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 2
DIR Next Page